Monday, October 11, 2010

YE09 Bump-Ups: How Did They Do?

At year-end 2009, there was lots of controversy as the USTA decided to bump some 30% of 3.5 players up to 4.0 (19% in Houston), and a 17% of 4.0s up to 4.5 (11% in Houston). The 4.5 ranks were relatively untouched (7% nationwide, 3% in Houston). People screamed about how they wouldn’t be “competitive” at their new level. I thought I’d look at the data to see how they actually fared, focusing on the USTA summer league as I believe it’s a more reliable dataset in terms of players playing to their capabilities.

First let’s look at the 4.5 level. There were 66 matches in the Summer USTA league where a YE09-bump-up-from-4.0 competed against a player who was already a 4.5 last year (or a doubles pair of bump-ups competed against a doubles pair of legacy 4.5s). The bump-ups won only 17% of those matches. There were also 30 matches in which current 4.0s chose to compete against current 4.5s, and the 4.0s’ winning percentage is very similar at 20%. The three-percentage-point difference I consider to be within the noise of the data.

What those figures suggest to me is that in the 4.5 division, neither an existing 4.0 nor a YE09-bump-up-from-4.0 is particularly competitive with a legacy 4.5. Everyone has his own definition of “competitive”, and I’m not sure I can even give you a number for mine, but I think it’s greater than 17-20%. I also find it interesting that the 4.0s who choose to compete against 4.5s are in general every bit as good as those poor souls who were bumped up.

Why did the 4.0-to-4.5 bump-ups fare so poorly against legacy 4.5s? One contributor has to be the fact that so few 4.5s were bumped up to 5.0 at YE09. This theory can be partially tested by looking at statistics from the 4.0 division (see below), where many of the best 4.0s did get moved up and out. I’d be interested to hear other theories.

Now let’s look at the 4.0 level. In the Summer USTA league there were 72 matches where a YE09-bump-up-from-3.5 competed against a legacy 4.0 (or a doubles pair of bump-ups competed against a doubles pair of legacy 4.0s). The bump-ups won a surprising (to me) 40% of those matches. There were 109 matches where current 3.5s chose to compete against current 4.0s, with the current 3.5 winning 22% of the time.

What these figures suggest to me is that, for YE09 promotions from 3.5 to 4.0, the USTA pretty much bumped up the right guys. A 40% winning percentage sure feels competitive to me. A 22% winning percentage does not, so I’d conclude that on average those 3.5s who didn’t get bumped up, shouldn’t have been bumped up. Of course there are individual exceptions in both directions.

So what does this all mean? Not a lot, really. The YE09 bump-up episode is all water under the bridge now, as evidenced by the fact that I no longer hear people talking (or moaning) about it much. But I found the numbers interesting nonetheless. We’ll see what kind of “corrections” occur when YE10 ratings are out.

As always, some interesting information and analysis. It's good to get some numbers to refute or support the complaints about the YE09 bump ups. My conclusion of the YE09 is that USTA got it right in 3.5, but may have bumped some 4.0 to 4.5 that should have remained in 4.0.

btw, the analysis was done for the summer league where tanking is not a predominant issue.

I'm sorry to say that half a million dollars ain't much for any organization that has several full-time employees. In fact, it is a sad commentary on the state of tennis in Houston. Tennis is a sport that lots of rich people play. The better question is:

Who are these several full time employees that you think HTA has? I think there are only 2 full time employees. The rest are either part time or volunteers.Also, how would you know how much money HTA has in the bank unless you are on the board. Do you know what their annual expenses are? For all we know, they are in the hundreds of thousands as well.If you are on the HTA Board, you shouldn't be anymore if you are attempting to divulge partial incomplete financial information. What is your agenda?

Almost all non-profits organizations (including the HTA) are required by law to file a Form 990 to the IRS every year. This form discloses among other things the assets of the organization, it's annual expenses and salaries of its top paid employees.

The form is a matter of public record and freely available to everyone. Multiple sites on the web index these. The URL above points to the Form 990 for the HTA for 2008.

Good analysis. The YE09 bump ups were a huge blunder by the USTA. Really stupid how you can decide to bump up massive amounts of folks in 2 divisions but leave a 3rd division untouched. Really screwed a bunch of 4.0 bump ups who now get the priveledge of getting creamed by legacy 4.5 guys many of which should be 5.0. I know most of these bump ups just quit playing. Especially out of town tourneys. What would be the point in travelling to get your butt kicked in the first round? Your numbers prove the USTA screwed up.

The whining has not gone away. It's just muffled with the passage of time and the realization that you can't fight city hall (or the dumb ass USTA). So you move on and find other things than tennis to invest your time and money into. Great job USTA!

Ok, Togashi's victory (as 3.5) against Moran does look pretty strong since Moran has a good record (as a 4.0) on TennisLink. So, perhaps Togashi tanked against Wilson to compensate. It's hard to draw any definitive conclusion based on one match.

Alabama won 4.0 Nationals. They had a guy on their roster that got bumped from 4.0 to 6.0 sometime during the year. Wonder if they had any others that were grossly out of level that made it through? Probably, since they won Nationals. Lubbock lost both singles lines in semis, then Minn lost both singles lines to Alabama. Thought Lubbock was tough, but no match for Nationals ringers.

Noticed that the Minnesota 4.0 mens team had nine 4.5 rated players on their roster. Looks like they started their local leagues back in October, so they were able to use their 08 year end ratings. They got moved up to 4.5 in Dec 09. I thought if you were playing, or going to a Sectionals or Nationals in 2010, you had to use the 09 year end ratings. Guess not.